| To: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 3/3 XFRM]: Fix invalid key for lookup of cached bundles |
| From: | Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 07 Mar 2005 04:11:17 +0100 |
| Cc: | davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050307025723.GA4818@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <E1D7t0w-0008Qa-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <422AF8D0.3010905@xxxxxxxxx> <20050307012458.GA4335@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <422BB14A.5030302@xxxxxxxxx> <20050307014337.GA4451@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <422BB477.3040607@xxxxxxxxx> <20050307015943.GA4533@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <422BBCC2.4010706@xxxxxxxxx> <20050307025723.GA4818@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050106 Debian/1.7.5-1 |
Herbert Xu wrote: The reason I'm asking is because the places where you're most likely to use tos/fwmark is in IPsec gateways. In other words, it isn't very useful unless it works in tunnel mode. This plus the fact that the check for tunnel mode is a bit of a hack makes me think that it's not worth it at the moment. Ok, let's drop it for now. One of my reasons for fixing it was that it gives clearly defined behaviour, which makes it easier for me to make sure the changes I made for xfrm resolution are correct. I'm simply going to assume it will be working correctly sometime. On the subject of fixing the scalability issue, we should just use the flow cache directly for each bundle. Let me think about it. Regards Patrick |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 3/3 XFRM]: Fix invalid key for lookup of cached bundles, Herbert Xu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [2/4] [IPSEC] Add xfrm_state_mtu, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 3/3 XFRM]: Fix invalid key for lookup of cached bundles, Herbert Xu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 3/3 XFRM]: Fix invalid key for lookup of cached bundles, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |